Genesis 2
PATin that book: (cap. IG.) That Moses speaks more magnificently of man, than any philosopher ever did: for they could say nothing of him beyond this, that he was /ut>6c k-6<Tfioc, a little world; but, according to the church’s account, his greatness consists not in his likeness to the created world, but in his being made k&t tkSva rc rov Kriaavroc tyvatws, after the image of the nature of the Creator of all things. Over all the earth*] Over all four-footed creatures in the earth, though novct so wild; as Bochartus observes. ItjLoSES having given a short account of the orderly pro* duction of all things, from the meanest to the noblest, explains more largely in this chapter some things, which were delivered briefly in the foregoing, because he would not too much interrupt the coherence of his discourse about the works of the six days. Particularly he relates bow Eve was made; and also further illustrates the production of Adam, &c. Ver.!L Thus the heavens, and the earth.] t. e. The visible world. Were finished.] Brought to that perfection wherein we see them. And all the hosts of them.] That is, all creatures in heaven and in earth; which are called host, or army, because of their vast variety, and excellent order. There is no mention, indeed, made of Adam’s, or Abel’s, &c. observing this day; which hath inclined many to conclude these words to have been written by way of anticipation: tliis day being set apart in aftertimes by the law of Moses for God’s service; but, in their opinion, not till then. To which I cannot agree; because it seems to me far more reasonable to think, that God took care to preserve the memory of the creation in the minds of mankind; and the worship of him, the one only God, by whom it was created: which could not be done by any means more effectually, than by setting apart this day for that purpose. Which if he had not appointed, yet men being made religious creatures, I cannot but think they would have agreed upon some set time for the exercise of their religion, as well as some set place (though that be not mentioned neither) where to meet for Divine service: and what time more proper, wherein to honour their Creator, with their sacrifices, praises, and thanksgivings, than this day? Which Philo well styles tov Kcafiov ytviawv, the birthday of the world: which was so much observed all the world over (though they forgot the reason), that the seventh day, he observes, may be truly called eopn) iruvfypoc, the universal festival, kept by all people. Josephus speaks to the samo purpose; and there is a great deal more said by Aristobulus, a peripatetic philosopher, out of Ilcsiod, Homer, and others, in Euseb. Prrep. Evang. lib. xiii. cap. 12. concerning the sacrcdness of the seventh day. Which, though Mr.. Sclden (lib. iii. dc Jure N. ct G. cap. 17, &c.) endeavours to prove is meant of the seventh day of the month, not of the seventh day of the week; yet we may look upon that as a remain of this ancient tradition. Which, in time, men forgot, as they did the most natural duties; having so corrupted their ways (as we read Gen. vi. 10, 11.) that there was nothing good among the generality of them. And therefore no wonder if they did not regard the service of God every seventh day: to which I shall shew, in due place, Noah, the only righteous man among them, had some regard. Which continued in the family of Abraham after the flood: TVIoses speaking of it, not long after their coming out of Egypt (where it is likely they were not suffered to observe it, having no time free from their intolerable labours), as a day known to them before the giving of the law at Mount Sinai, Exod. xvi. 23. 25, 2G. Which is not to be understood, as if the patriarchs, before and after the flood, kept such a rest as God enjoined the Israelites by Moses: for that was proper to them, for a peculiar reason — because they had been slaves in Egypt; and therefore were commanded to keep the sabbath, wilhout doing any manner of work upon that day. (Dcut. v. 15.) Which is all the Christian fathers mean, when they say the patriarchs did not Sabbatizare, keep the sabbatli as the Jews did. (See Tertullian adv. Judaios, cap. 2, ct 4. Irenreus, and others.) For in religious offices I doubt not • they observed tho seventh day; as a proper time for that sacred hymn, which Galen himself (lib. iii. dcusu partium) says, wc should all sing to the Creator of all; " If we ourselves first know, and then tell others, oloc pi* ken rijv aofyiav, &t\ how wonderful he is in wisdom, how great in power, and how rich in goodness/’ Because that in it he had rested from all his work.’] This is the reason why thi3day was distinguished from the other six; that a remembrance of God’s resting from all his works on this day, might be preserved; by men’s laying aside their other employments so long as to praise Him solemnly, by whom this great world was made. Which God created, and made.] Or, as the Hebrew phrase is, created to make, i. e. rested from all the six days’ work. For he created something at the first, out of which to make all the rest, in six days’ space; and now he ceased from all. Vcr. 4. These are the generations, &c] That is, thisis’a faithful account of the original of f he world. Which Moses here repeats, more deeply to imprint on the people’s minds, that the world was not a god, but the work of God: which they were to acknowledge every seventh day. In the day (i.e. At that time, so day often signifios) when the Lord God made the earth and the heavens.] It is observed by Tertullian, that exinde Dominus qui retro Dens tantttm, Sec. from henceforward (vcr. 7, 8, 9. J 5, &c.) he is called Lord, who hitherto was called only God: of which he endeavours to give a reason. (L. adv. Hermog. cap. 3.) The Hebrew doctors observe, that Jehovah Elohim (Lord God) joined together, is the full and perfect name of God: and therefore fitly reserved till this place, when the Avorks of God were perfected, and not before. none better or shorter than that of Nazianzen’s, who says, it IS to teach US, ty oray i^aioujfit^u cut rijv (u’drp, &td rby x ? VM m rcXXoi/itSo, that when we are apt to be lifted np because we are made after God’s image, the thoughts of the dirt out of which we were taken, may humble and lay us low. And God breathed into his nostrils the breath of life.’] This being said of no other creature, leads us to conceive, not only that the soul of man is a distinct thing, of a different original from his body; but that a more excellent spirit was put into him by God (as appears by its operations) than into other animals. For though the simple speech of inspiring him with " the breath of life/’ would not prove this; yet Moses speaking in the plural number, that God breathed into him nisclnnath chcyim, the breath or spirit of lives, it plainly denotes, not only that spirit which makes man breathe and move; but think alsct, reason, and discourse. And he became a living sonl.] This is the immediate result of the union of the soul with the body. AVhich Eusebius thus explains: (lib. vii. Proepar. Evang. cap. 10.) Moses having laid the foundations of religion beforementioned, viz. The knowledge of God, and of the creation of the world, proceeds to another point of doctrine lppst necessary to be understood; which is the knowledge of a mans self; to which he leads him by shewing the difference between his soul and the body: his soul being an intelligent substance, made after the image of God; his body, only an earthly covering of the soul. To which Moses adds a third, 7ryoijv faffs lytortxfivTtva, Kat ovyairTtKijy Suvafitv, &c. A certain vital breath, whereby the other two are united and linked together by apowerfnl bond, or strong tie. His soul, it is manifest, did not come out of the earth, or any power of matter; but from the power of God, who infused it into him by his Divine inspiration. And this was the original of Eve’s soul also, though it be not mentioned: for if her soul had been made out of Adam, as her body was, he would have said, not only, She is bone of my bone, but soul of my soul; which, would have mightily strengthened the bond of marriage, and exceedingly heightened conjugal affection. ■ lahs; one descended from Cash, (Gen. x. 7.) and the other from Jocktan, (ver. 2<).) The latter of these cannot be here meant, for his posterity were planted eastward; but the former, who were a more western people, in that part of Arabia Fclix> which bordered upon (his stream. For the Ishmaelites (who inhabited Arabia Dcserta) are described by Moses, (xxv. 18.) as bounded by Shur towards Egypt, and by llavilah in the way to Assyria. And Saul found Havilah in after-times in the very same situation. (1 Sam. xv. 7.) And still, much later, Strabo mentions the Xaw- \oraloi (which are % certainly the posterity of Chavilah) among the people of Arabia. See Bochart’s Phulcg. lib. iv. cap. 11. Jfliere there is gold.’] Nothing is more famous than the gold of Arabia: where Diodorus Siculus says it is digged up in great lumps, as big as a chesnut; lib. ii. p. 1)3. Edit. H. Stcph. being well instructed in his banishment, and prepared for a restitution, at the general resurrection and new creation." Lib. ii. ad Autolycum.
Genesis 2:2
And on the seventh day, God ended his work. Or rather, had ended (as it may be translated), for he did not work on the seventh day: but, rested from all his work which he had made; having so completely finished it, that there remained no more to be done. An emblem of the rest that we shall have, when wc have done our work faithfully, and left none undone, as Origen’s words are, lib. vi. contra Cclsum.
Genesis 2:3
And God blessed the seventh day, and sanctified it. As God sanctified Jeremiah in aftcrtimes from his mother’s womb, (Jcr.i. 5.) by ordaining him to be a prophet; so ho now determined and appointed the seventh day, from the very beginning of the world, to be observed in memory of its creation. And this setting it apart, and consecrating it to that holy use, was his blessing it, or recommending it to be observed, as a day of blessing and praising him, in all his w-orks of wonder; and (I know not why I should not add) of his bestowing blessings upon all his pious worshippers.
Genesis 2:5
And every plant in the field before it was in the earth, &c. That is, before there was any seed to produce them, God made them to spring up with their seed in them; as was said before, in the first chapter. And Moses here mentions these alone, because they were the first productions out of the earth; without which there had been no food for living creatures. For the Lord God had not caused it to rain on the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.] Here are two reasons to confirm, that plants were not produced in the way they arc noAV: for, there had been no showers of rain; nor was there any man to prcparo the earth to’ receive the seed (if there had been any); both which arc necessary in the ordinary method of Divine providence, ever since the world was made. From hence some collect there were no Prasadamites (people before Adam), for then Moses could not have said, " Thero was no man to till the earth." Ver. G. But there went up a mist, &c] Many think this will best cohere with what went before by translating it, nor did there (taking the particle tib not, from the foregoing verse, as is usual) a mist go np from the earth. (SceDrusius in Lcvit. x. G. and Hottinger in Ilcxapl. Paris, p. 80.) But I sec no necessity of this; and think it more likely, there did go up a vapour or steam out of tho earth, when it came reeking out of the waters, (as was said upon verse 0. of chap. 1.) to moisten the superficies of it; before any clouds were raised, by the power of the sun, to give rain. Vcr. 7. Oat of the dust of the ground.] Not dry, but moist dust, as the LXX. have it, tov Mpuwov, %ovv «™ yfc. From whence the apostle calls him uvOpwrrov x’’™ y > (1 Corinth, xv. 47.) which teaches us this dust was mixed with water: for so % ^ signifies; limus y as tho Vulgar Latin hath it. Which agrees with the Hebrew jatzar, formed; which is used concerning potters, who make their vessels of clay, not of dry earth. Diodorus Siculus seems to have had some notion of this, when he saith, man was made out of " the slime or mud of Nile.*’ Upon which original of man’s body the ancient fathers make many pious reflections: but
Genesis 2:8
And the LqxxL God planted. Or, had planted; for it doth not seem to beU new thing. A garden.’] A most pleasant part of the earth. Eastward.’] Or, as others translate it, before, in the beginning, viz. On the third day, when he made all vegetables. And it cannot be denied, that mikkedeni may signify time as well as place: but as the greatest part of interpreters, ancient and modern, take it hereto signify place; so Moses himself uses it in the following part of this book, III. 24. xi. 2. xii. 8. xiii. 11. \ In Eden.] A country (as most understand Yt) so called, •perhaps, from its pleasure: Toirov ha^opoy fart^iavyh aept XafiTrporipy, tyvToig iray*:aXo(C, as Thcophilus de AlltolyC speaks. (lib. ii.) AVhere Eden was, thero are tw<^ or three places of Scripture that give some direction, to ou"r search; (2 Kings xix. 12. Isa. xxxvii. 12. Ezek. xxvii. 2&.) which shew there was a country, that, for many ages aiYcr this, retained the name of Eden: and that eastward, as BJoses here tells us, it was situated; that is, eastward of Jutfea, or of the desert of the Amorites, where he wrote thescX books. For the Scripture calls.those people " The children of the.east," who dwelt in Arabia, Mesopotamia, and Persia. But in what country of Uic east Eden was, will be best understood from ver. 10. And there he put the man, whom he had formed.] He was formed we must suppose in some other place; and conducted hither by God, in token of his singular kindness to him. AVhere he declared him, saith a Syriac writer mentioned by Hottinger, (in his Dissert, de Hexaplis, Paris, p. 115.) an heir of paradise, and made him W32) NJrDI N3^D a king, a priest, and a prophet.
Genesis 2:9
And out of the ground. Of that garden beforementioned. Made the Lord God to grow every /rec,&c] The greatest variety of the choicest plants, flowers, and fruits: for tree comprehends every thing that grows out of the earth. Pleamnt to the sight.] He gratified man’s eye, as well as his taste, and his smell. The tree of life.] So called, because there was a virtue in it, as several of the ancient fathers think, not only to repair the animal spirits, as other nourishment doth; but also to preserve and maintain them, and all the organs of the body, in the same equal temper and state wherein they were created, without any decay: until man should have been fit to be translated into another world. To this purpose Irenajus, St. Chrysostom, Theodoret, but especially Greg. Nazianzen speak, El ply ovy ipuvapty, &c. " If therefore we had continued what we were, and kept the commandment, we should have been what we were not by coming to the tree of life, awaSavaTHrSiyrtQ teal 0w wXtjaiaaayreg, being made immortal, and approaching nigh to God." (Orat. xliii. p. 699. D.) And why we should think it impossible or unlikely, that God should make such a fruit, I do not see. Nay, it seems necessary there should have been such a kind of food; unless we will suppose God would have preserved Adam (had he continued innocent) from dying, by a continual miracle: which is a harder supposition than the other. But this garden being also a type of heaven, perhaps God intended by this tree to represent that immortal life, which he meant to bestow upon man with himself. (Rev. xxii. 2.) And so St. Austin in that famous saying of his: “Erat ei in creteris liguis alimentum, in isto autem sacramentum:” (lib. viii. de Gen. ad Lit. cap. 4.) In other trees there was nourishment for man; but in this also a sacra ment. For it was both a symbol of that life which God had already bestowed upon man (who was hereby put in mind, that God was the author of his being, and all his enjoyments), and of that life he was to hope for in another world, if he proved obedient. In the midst of the garden.] This signifies cither its situation, or its excellence: for that which is most eminent in any place, the Hebrews say is " in the midst," xxiii. 10. The tree of knowledge of good and evil.] So called, as 1 take it, because God intended by this tree to prove Adam and Eve, whether they would be good or bad: which was to be made known, by their abstaining from its fruit, or eating of it. It is generally thought indeed by interpreters (of which I leave the reader to judge), that it had this name afterwards; either because the tempter pretended it would make them so wise, as to know all things, (for so good and evil may be expounded, chap. iii. 5. to signify as much as all things whatsoever) or because, in the event, pon the eating of this fruit, they did actually know, by Digitized by microsoft ® CHAP. II.] UPON GENESIS. miserable experience (which they would not learn without it), the great difference between obeying and disobeying God’s commands. -That is, they who did not sufficiently attend to their duty, nor consider what it was to sin, and what the effect of it would be; presently, upon the eating of this fruit, reflected upon both. For they saw how grievous it was to incur God’s displeasure, by believing a creature rather than him; and by being so ungrateful, as not to acknowledge his bounty in all the blessings they enjoyed; without thinking him envious in denying them one, as a proof of their obedience. Some think it was so called, as a caveat to them, not to study craft and subtilty; but to content themselves in a simple, plain way of life (wherein God made them), without any curiosity to know more than was needful for them. Which they think is confirmed by chap. iii. 6, " She saw it was good to make one wise," i. e. cuuning and wily.
Genesis 2:10
And a river went out of Eden, &c. These words afford us such a key to open to us the place where this garden was planted, that one can scarce doubt whereabout it was; though the precise spot of ground be not marked out in this description of it. For it lay inthe country of Eden; and we are directed to find that out by this remarkable circumstance, that a river ivent out of it: which doth not signify, that the spring of the river was in Eden; but that the river run through that country into the garden, to water it. The garden, therefore, it is probable, was a part of the province of Eden; and was watered by that river which came from it. The only difficulty is, to find what river this was. Our countryman Mr. Carver, in his learned discourse of the Terrestrial Paradise, (chap, vii.) endeavours to prove, that the two great rivers, Euphrates and Tigris, having but one and the same fountain in Armenia the Greater, run along for some time in one stream, called Tigris: upon which he thinks this garden was seated, before this river parted into two streams, Euphrates and Tigris. This he confirms out of the two Epistles of the Nestorian Christians written to Rome 1552, and translated by Masius; where they call Tigris the River of Eden. And there are indeed some ancient authors, particularly Lucan and Boetius, who say that these two rivers come out of the same spring: but their mistake arose, it is likely, from hence, that they sprung(as Strabo tells us) out of one and the same mountain, viz. Niphates, which is a part of Taurus: and Euphrates sprung oufofthe northern side of it, and Tigris out of the southern; as Salmasius observes upon Solinns, (p. 621, &c.) Certain it is, that the best authors, both ancient and modern, make them to have different springs, from whence they hold different courses, Euphrates towards the west, and Tigris towards the east: and do not make one river, till (after they have run through many countries) they meet and join together about Apamia, according to Ptolemy. And then indeed they make, for a long way, but one great stream: which I take to he the river here mentioned by Moses, that run througli the country of Eden, which perhaps lay on both sides of the river; as the garden, it is plain, by ver. 8. did on the eastern side of it; extending itself to the place where these united rivers parted again. For so it follows: And from thence.’] i. e. Below the garden. It parted.] Or, was divided again, as it had been before into two other streams. By which words we seem to have found the place where the garden ended; but being not told where it began, nor how far it spread itself eastward from the river side, I will not presume to say what country or countricsit included. Certain it is, there was a country, as I observed before, called Eden in aftertimes, which was part of the kingdom of Assyria, (2 Kings xix. 12.) And that kingdom then comprehended not only the country anciently called Ashur, but Mesopotamia and Babylonia, &c. In some part of which last province it is probable this garden was seated. And became into four heads.] He doth not say was parted into four heads, but became into four heads (whose names here follow); two before they united, viz/Tigris and; Euphrates; and two after they again parted, viz. Pison and Gihon. These he calls heads, or principal rivers, as David Chyr trasus, I think, rightly understands it; quatuor illustria et magna flnmina efficiebant, made four famous and great rivers. For all divisions from the main stream are called the heads of a water; as Sir W. Raleigh observes out of Ulpianus. And it is indifferent, whether the water come’ out of a fountain, or out of a river, or a lake: for that part of the river (suppose) where the branch forsakes the main stream, is called the head of that branch; which becomes a new river. In like manner may Euphrates and Tigris be called the heads of that river which they made at their* meeting: as where they part again, the beginnings (as the LXX. translate the word) of the other two rivers, Pison • and Gihon, are properly called the heads of them.
Genesis 2:11
The name of the first is Pison, or Phison. This is that branch which runs westerly; and being nearest to the place where Moses wrote, on the other side of Jordan, is first mentioned by him. It is a. long time since both this river and Gihon have lost these names: the Greek and Roman writers calling them still, > after their parting, by the names they had before they met, Euphrates and Tigris. But there was a remainder of the name of Pison preserved in the easterly river, called Pasitigris, which is the same with Oroatis, as Salmasius observes in his Exerc.Plinianav in Solin. p. 701, 702: and is called (as Mr. Carver notes) by Xenophon simply Physcus; in which the name of Phison is plainly enough retained. Which continued till the time of Alexander the Great; for Q. Curtius, as he further notes, commonly calls Tigris itself by the name of Phasis, and says it was so called by the inhabitants thereabout. Which, in all probability, was at first the name of this other river Phison; but lost by the many alterations which were made, for a long time, in the course of it, as Pliny tells us. For he says, the Orcheni, and other neighbouring nations, made great and deep cuts or canals to carry the water of Euphrates (meaning this river) into their fields; and so it lost its course, and run thrbugh Tigris and the marshes into the sea. Strabo saith the same, that from these hupvyat, as he calls them, deep trenches, which carried the water of Euphrates into Tigris, came the name of Pasitigris; that is, Pison mixed with Tigris. See Salma sius in the forenamed Exercitations, page 703. where he shews this river was not perfectly restored to its course till the timesof Alexander the Great. That is it which compasseth the whole land of Ilavilah.~] By finding where this country was, we certainly find tho* river Phison. Now Moses makes mention of two Havi-
Genesis 2:12
And thegold of that land is good. i. e. Is excellent: for the forenamed author says, it is of such a flaming colour, that it adds much to the lustre of precious stones, that are set in it. Tliere is bdellium.’] The Hebrew word being bedolach, some have thought bdellium to come from thence, which is an aromatic gum. Others think bedolach to be crystal, others amber; but Bochart rather thinks it signifies pearl: which he proves (in his Hicrozoic. pt. ii. lib. v. cap. 25.) from the country itself here mentioned, viz. llavilah, which he looks upon as that part of Arabia which lies upon the Persian Gulph: at Catipha, there is a great pearlfishing. The manna also, wherewith the Israelites were fed in the wilderness, is described (Numb. xi. 7.) to be round like coriander seed, and of the colour of bedolach. Now, in his former description, Closes says it was white, (Exod. xvi. 14.) which agrees to pearls, as also doth roundness, but not to the sweet gum called bdellium: of which see Salmasius in his Excrc. Plin. p. 1150. And the onyx stone.] This country also was famous for precious stones; as appears by the report which Nearchus (Alexander’s admiral) made of the western coast of the Persian Gulph, in Strabo, lib. xvi. But Braunius (lib. ii. de Vestitu Sacerd. Hebr. cap. 18. ) thinks schoham sfiould rather be translated the sardonyx. Whichsoever it be, Arabia was famous both for the onyx and sardonyx, as Salmasius observes out of Pliny; ib. p. 5G2, 563.
Genesis 2:13
The name of the second river is Gihon. There are no footsteps of this name remaining that I can find^ but we arc directed, by the country it is said to compass, to take, it to be the eastern stream that arose from the parting of Euphrates and Tigris; as Pison, I said, was the western. Compasseih, or, runneth along by the whole land of Ethiopia.] Or Cush: who was seated more eastward than his sons, Havilah, Seba, and the rest, (mentioned Gen. x. G, 7.) upon the borders of this river. For when people first began to spread themselves, they kept as near to great rivers as they could; for the better communication one with another, and affording mutual succour and assistance. It is probable that he gave name to the country of Susiana; which the Greeks called Klatrta, and is now called by the Persians, Chuzestan;?. e. the province of Chus. And when his posterity multiplied, they went more westward, toward the Arabian sea: from whence his brother Milzraim passed into Egypt. Our translators follow tho LXX. in rendering the Hebrew name Cush, by Ethiopia: not meaning that in Africa, but this in Asia. For the ancients frequently mention a double Ethiopia, as many have observed; particularly Job Ludolphus, who herein justifies the LXX. in great part; lib. ii. Comment, in Histor. Ethiop. cap. iii. n. 1G.
Genesis 2:14
The name of the third is Uiddekel. Which river, being called by Daniel (x. 4.) the great river; cannot be, as many have fancied, Naharmalcha: for that was buta cut, made byTrajan to waft his army out of Euphrates into Tigris (as Ammianus Marcellinus tells us), and therefore Hiddekcl isTigris itself. Which, as Pliny says, was called Diglito in those parts where its course was slow; and where it began to be rapid, it took the name of Tigris. And so the Arabians call this river Deglat, and Degcla, from the Hebrew word Uiddekel Which Salmasius derives from Hadda, or Chadda, sharp pointed; and Kal, swift; because of its very quick and hasty motion: and thence the Greeks, he observes, derive the name of Tigris, a™ nje o^njroc. (Exerc. in Solin. p. 601.) Rauwolff, in his Travels, (pt. ii. cap. 9.) says, that when he was at Caruch, on the confines of Media (which was about a hundred years ago), Tigris was still called in their language Hidekel. Which goeth toward the east of Assyria.] If it make a great bend northward (as Pliny saith it doth about Apamia), it must needs run towards the east of Assyria, for some time. But this is not the course of the river; and therefore the LXX. translate the word kidmath, which we English towards the east, simply toward: and it is certain Tigris did run by Assyria; for Nineveh, the chief city of Assyria, stood upon the east side of this river, as Bochart hath demonstrated in his Phaleg. lib. iv. cap. 20. The fourth river is Euphrates.,] None doubt that the river called here in the Hebrew Pcrath, or Phrath, is the same that hath been called for many ages Euphrates. The course of which was so well known in those days, that Moses gives no description of it.
Genesis 2:15
And the Lord God took the man. After such a manner as he took David from the sheepfolds, (Psal. lxxviii. 70.) by an extraordinary motion. For as a prophet was sent from God to anoint him; so God himself, I suppose, appeared to Adam, in a visible glorious majesty, which the Jews call the Schechinah; (as was noted before, i. 3.) because it was a tokeu of God’s special presence, and by it he dwelt among his people. It seems to have been a very shining flame, or amazing splendour of light, breaking out of a thick cloud: of which we afterward read very often, under the name of " the glory the Lord;" which at first appeared to Moses, as " aflame of fire out of the midst * of a bush/’ (Exod. iii. 2.) To this I cannot thiuk our first parents to have been strangers; but look upon it as highly probable, that this Divine Majesty conducted Adam from the place where he was formed into the garden of Eden. And put him.] Or, placed him there. To dress it, and to keep it.] To preserve it, by his care and labour, in the condition wherein he found it. Thcophilus Antiochenus thinks it is not without a mystery, that God’s putting man into paradise is twice mentioned, (here, and ver. 8.) to signify, that after’ man was cast out of one paradise, he should still have a right to another: " By
Genesis 2:16
And the Lord God commanded the man. This is a farther indication, that the Divine Majesty appeared to Adam and spake to him, as he did to Moses out of the flame in the bush, saying, Of every tree in the garden thou mayest freely eat.’] A very liberal concession; which was abundantly sufficient to demonstrate that it was not envy (of which the Divine nature is not capable) which moved their Creator to abridge our first parents’ liberty in one particular;
Genesis 2:17
But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, (why so called, see ver. 9.) thou shall not eat of it. This small restraint it was fit to lay upon Adam, to make him sensible, that though he had dominion over all things, yet he was not their lord; but a servant of the Most High: who required this abstinence in token of his subjection, and to prove his obedience to him. This account many of the fathers give of it; particularly Tertullian, who calls this the primordial laiv: which was, quasi matrix omnium prceceptornm Dei, (adv. Judseos, cap. 2.) including, as it were, in its womb, all the natural laws of God. For as, in observing this law, he had testified his unspotted love and obedience to God; so, in violating it, be threw off the Divine government, and opposed his own will to God’s. But still some ask, why should his obedience be tried in such an instance as this? Not considering, that an experiment of it could scarce have been made in any of the moral precepts; which there was no occasion to violate. For what should tempt him to idolatry, or to take God’s name in vain, or to murder his wife? How was it possible to commit adultery, when there was nobody but be and she in the world? How could he steal, or what room was there then for coveting, when God had put him in possession of all tilings? It bad been in vain to forbid that which could not be done; and it had not been virtue to abstain from that to which there was no temptation, but from that which invited them to transgress. I speak in the plural number; because it must be remembered, that this prohibition was given, not only to Adam, but to Eve also, (iii. 1, 2.) an account of whose production immediately follows. Theoph. Antiochenus, in the place beforcnamed, hath several pretty reflections upon this prohibition; and this among the rest: That Adam and Eve, being but newly brought into the world, were in simplicity, to be wholly ordered and governed by the will and pleasure of their heavenly Parent; and not affect much knowledge (as not agreeable to their infant state), but to grow up in it by degrees, and notWcp t%u ^uiuV fpovtiv, to aim at wisdom above their age. To which purpose Greg. Nazianzeu also discourses in many places. (Orat.xxxviii. p. G19; Orat.xlii. p. GS1; and Carm. Arcan. vii. p. 1(>2.) And indeed many excellent meditations may be raised from hence; particularly, that Christians new-born should not be so greedy of knowledge, as careful and solicitous of well-doing: for many have been ruined by early speculations. Which, if one could pick any good sense out of such stuff as the Valentinians uttered, I should think they intended to represent, when they said, the last of their JEons, whom they called Wisdom, labouring to comprehend the /3u$o C, or depth(i. e. the Father of all), had like to have lost itself, till it was helped by opog, or limit. That is, we are preserved by setting some bounds to our desires after knowledge. TIiou shall surely die.] In the Hebrew, dying thou shall die; to shew the certainty of it, as we rightly translate it. Which doth not signify, as appears by the event, that he should instantly die; but become mortal; lose the immortality wherewith he was invested. (Gen. iii. 19.). And; as Athanasius thinks, the doubting the expression denotes, ft)) fiovov cnrodv1)crKEiv, a\Xa teal iv njf tov Sclvutov
Genesis 2:18
And the Lord God said. Or, had said, as it is by some translated; the better to shew’ that the foregoing precept was given to both. And to say in this place, is as much as to resofoe and decree: as Melancthon well explains it, in one of his Epistles:’* Dicere, hoc loco significat, mirandasapientiasancire, et nobis hocdecretum tradere:" To say here signifies to establish ivith wonderful vnsdom, and to deliver this decree to us. (lib. i. Epist. 126.) Where he again repeats it, " The Lord said;" that is, by his wise counsel and immutable decree, he established this order. It is not good that man should be alone.] Uncomfortable to want society, and unfit there should not be an increase of mankind. Concerning which Plato hath left these wonderful words: (lib. vi. De Legibus:) This is the encouragement to marriage — not only that the human race may be perpetuated; but a man may, 7ra/£ctc irafiwv cut t$ 0£y virtjptTag hv& avTov irapaStMyai, leave children’s children behind him when he is gone, to serve God in his stead. I will make him an help.] For all the necessities and uses of life. Meet for him.] In whose company he shall take delight; so the Hebrew phrase, as before him, imports; being as much as, answerable to him, every way fitted for him; not only in likeness of body, but of mind, disposition, and affection: which laid the foundation of perpetual familiarity and friendship. Or, as the author of Cether Shem Tobh, mentioned by Hackspan, interprets it, " She shall always be ready to observe and serve him." For to stand before any one, in the Hebrew language, signifies readiness to do what is desired. See more on ver. 25.
Genesis 2:19
And out of the ground the Lord God formed. Or, had formed; i. 20. 24. Every beast of the field, &c] The ground here must be understood to comprehend the water also; out of which the fowl were made. And brought them unto Adam.] It is commonly thought that this name of Adam; given to the first man, signifies as much as red earth. But Job Ludolphus hath made it far more probable that it imports elegant, or beautiful. (See his Histor. Ethiop. lib. i. cap. 15. n. 17, 18. and his commentaries upon that chapter, n. 107.) How the beasts and birds were brought to him we are not told: but it is likely by the ministry of angels; who were* perpetual attendants upon the Schechinah, or Divine Majesty. To see what he ivonld call them.] To exercise and improve his understanding. And whatever Adam called, &c] God approved of it,
And God created man in his own image. From these words Origcn gathers there is a great, deal of difference between E*mv, image, and'0/io/m/i«, likeness; because, though God said, (ver. 2G.) " Let us make man in our image, and after our likeness," yet here he is said to have made him only in hte own image; and not, for the present, after his likeness. For that, saith he, (lib. iv. contra Celsum) is reserved to the other world; when, as St. John says, (LEpist. iii. 2.) oftotoi uvrf MptZa, we shall be like him. But this seems too curious. No doubt God made man just as he designed, in such a complete resemblance of himself, that there is no creature like to man, no more than God hath any equal to himself: as some of the Hebrew doctors explain this matter. And therefore Moses repeats it again, " in the image of God created he him:" # to imprint upon the minds of men, a sense of tho great dignity of human nature; which was foully debased by worshipping any creature. Male and female created he them.’] He made woman the same day he made man; as he did both sexes of all other living creatures, and as he made herbs and plants with seed in them, to propagate their species on tho same day they were produced. It is plain by this, also, that woman, as well as man, was made in the image of God. And it seems to be pertinently observed by Abarbinel, that Moses here again uses the word create (and that three times) to denote the original of human souls; which are not made out of prc-cxistcnt matter, as our bodies are; but by the power of God, when they had no being at all.
And God blessed them, &c. The former part of this blessing," be fruitful and multiply," God hath bestowed before (ver. 22.) upon other creatures: unto which he adds two things here, " replenish the earth, and subdue it." He gives them tho whole earth for their possession, with a power to subdue it: that is, to make it fit for their habitation, by bringing under or driving away wild beasts. For, secondly, he gives them the dominion (unto which he designed them in their creation) over all other creatures; whether in the water, air, or earth. And he speaks to them in the plural number; which is a demonstration, that man and woman were both created, and received his blessing, on the same day.
Behold I have given you, &c. Here he assigns them their food; and makes no mention at all of beasts, but only of plants and fruits of the earth. For beasts being made by pairs, in their several species (we may well suppose) as man and woman were, and not being yet multiplied, the killing of beasts, birds, and fishes, would have been the destruction of the kind: whereas, there were plants innumerable and great variety of fruit for their sustenance. And therefore here being no grant made to them of animals for their food, though no prohibition neither, it is very prohablo they abstained from eating flesh, till after the flood, (when God expressly gave them every living thing for meat, as much as the herbs, eh. ix. 2.) unless it were upon some special occasions; as, pcniaps, when they sacrificed living creatures; which they did in process of time, (iv. 4.) though not at the first.
And to every beast, &c. Here he gives to tho beasts, and fowl, and creeping things, all herbs for their food, but saith nothing of fruit; from which we cannot W f cll think the birds would abstain; and therefore they arc included in the phrase, of every green herb.
Very good. From these words Epiphanius confutes the Manichees, Haercs. lxvi.n.18. where there is an explanation of this phrase," God saw that it was good," throughout this whole chapter. Where it being said at the end of every day’s work, " God saw it was good;" and particularly here on the sixth day, before he had quite ended the work of it, he saith so of the formation of the beasts, (Ver. 25.) AbaTbincl will have this to relate peculiarly to the creation of man and woman. But the beginning of the verse plainly shews that ho speaks of every thing that he had made: and therefore their doctors in Bcreschith Rabba (whom he mentions) say a great deal better, that man is meant in the first and principal place, when Moses says, " God saw every thing that he had made; and behold, it was very good,"